U;tra- Rich are screwing the middle class and the poor

No wonder you haven't been successful in your life with these fallacious beliefs.

- - - Updated - - -

We love pointing out bad treatement and then we don't deal with those people anymore and they go out of business rather than just whine about them and let them screw us like liberals do.

 

Tax rates have nothing to do with GDP nor does the federal budget. The government does not have some claim to a percentage of GDP. The goal is to lower the amount of GDP the government takes by growing the economy faster than government thus creating more jobs and more wealth for everyone top to bottom.

 

You need to learn the difference between wealth, income and GDP. We don't tax wealth on the federal level

How telling you didn't say "earn anything" that they should just get stuff and then they wouldn't be poor.

As opposed to earning something?

Well thank your mentality for there not being enough jobs and people refusing to take the ones that are available, why work when you can just "get it" from government?

Because you don't grow the economy and create jobs by "recycling" wealth, ie take it from one person and give it to another person.

 

And how did Obama and the Democrats MASSIVE spending increase workout? Are we back to full employment and rising income as during the Bush/Republican years?

 

No, I am talking about the history of capitalism, which has exhibited a cycle of longer terms between boom and bust over each cycle but with the height/depth gradually deepening at the same time. In other words, early capitalism had lots of short shallow boom/bust cycles, 19th century capitalism had a medium number of fairly substantial boom/bust cycles and modern capitalism has had a few number of large or very large boom/bust cycles. Can you really blame all of that on government and socialism?

 

Which just goes to show that it should've been more. When individuals and corporations are not spending, it only leaves one thing left that can spend..............the government.

 

What spending increase are you talking about?

The lie that the Republicans have been perpetuating? The Obama spending binge is actually a myth.

Keep believing lies.

 

Lotsa good stuff on Netflix. One on how Walmart screws the communities they take over. Zeightgiest (forgive the spelling) is great, along with the 'addendum' to it (two separate films). If more people would take the time to check out things like this, we COULD actually have a shot a changing the corrupt system we all have to be subjected to. I don't actually anticipate that happening though. I'll check out Park Avenue, as I haven't seen that one yet.

- - - Updated - - -

Why not 10 jobs at 3 cents each??

- - - Updated - - -

Thank you. My thoughts exactly.

 

The stuff of folly. We spent more than a $1,000B more for over 4 years. We didn't need that during the boom during the Bush administration did we.

 

The one that started with the 2008FY budget and then jumped dramatically in the 2009FY budget and has carried on ever since. That they, Obama and the Democrats, raised it so dramatically and then have held there at that level that past 56 years is sign of success how exactly?

 

Those budgets were from the Bush administration....

 

what a bunch of crap. Upper middle class and the rich pay a much higher PERCENTAGE of their income in federal taxes.

If you are going to post these hard figures then give us the link to the liberal rag you got them from.

 

And when individuals and corporations are not spending, it only leaves one entity that can spend................government. If it would have been more, it would have done its job.

 

"Individuals" and "corporations" included in the same thought is absurd. One has nothing to do with the other. Government regulation CAN buffer what is allowed to get away with, but often, corporate entities are able to purchase much of government as well so, it's usually a lose, lose scenario. I'd much rather see government spread, as opposed to the 'Walmart style' corporate scum that have destroyed our country. Too much of either though, isn't good, granted.

 

Come on Rtwngafraud, you know better than that!(I think you misunderstood what I said, since you and I are on the same political field(or it seems as though we are based on your posts that I have read and liked). Corporations are not people no matter how hard Romney tried to sell it. How would you classify or label the spending done for businesses, since you and I both know corporations are not people.

And if individuals are not spending and corporations are not spending..............who's left? The government or something else that Im not aware of?

 

the upper middle class pays the highest percentage.
The rich earn much higher percentages of their income in the form of gains and avoid the taxes the upper middle class endure.
The upper middle class subsidizes the rich and the poor.

 

To get right down to it dude, it's all one big smokescreen. It's a system of debt, based on debt, and it only proceeds if the debt keeps accruing. That depends on spending money we don't have (actually NEVER had). Once that stops, the pyramid scheme crashes down very quickly, and that's what we're BEGINNING to see now. The mistake you overlook, I think, is that corporations control ALL OF IT. Unaccountable entities who are there simply to generate the maximum profit possible, without any responsibility. Blackmail, corruption, all that, should not be dismissed. That's all part and parcel though, of "the corporation", almost by definition.

The terms 'government' and 'corporations' can often be used interchangeable but, 'people'? That's something else entirely. I just don't assign the same level of acceptance that 'government' is always the problem, that I think you do. Rather the corporation IS ALWAYS the problem. Maybe that's the characteristic we're not seeing eye to eye on?

 

Frankly the rich pay a ton too. Half of all people in the USA do not pay any federal taxes at all. These people are being covered by ALL of the others, middle class to the rich.

 

though this may be true, there is no reason to pay at the 39% rate, making $350,000, when someone worth $350,000,000,000 pays at a significantly lower rate, as a much larger percentage of his income will be gains and not simple w-2 wages.

 

So it is not a high income from earning that bugs you but rather income from saving and investing? Or is it only income from saving and investing when someone has been successful at saving and investing? If you punish people who invest will you not dampen the economy?

 

Income is income, no matter how you get it. When you have that much, investing is your occupation. Why should some income be exempt ?

 

Because the wealthy pay themselves $1 salaries and only pay the capital gains rate on there $30^999. Investing income is (partially) exempt because the wealthy bribed the politicians to write it that way.

- - - Updated - - -

How is it punishing someone for making them pay the same amount in taxes through investing as someone pays through working?

- - - Updated - - -

Where do people get this idea? Is it actually true or was it more republican lies?

 

So then you would have the gains that a poor man makes in an investment not taxed and the gains made by the rich man taxed at 39%? Since the very high taxation level that you will impose on the rich man's investment will likely exceed a potential gain then the rich man will simply not invest his money. The money will sit with no gain. hence the stagnant economy point I am making.

 

the tax codes were written to benefit the rich. The poor are thrown table scraps so that they'll keep voting for them, even though it will never improve their lot in life.

 

This is a complete logical fallacy. We had top marginal tax rates of 70% and higher before Reagan (*)(*)(*)(*)ed (*)(*)(*)(*) up and those super high rates didn't stop businessmen like Warren Buffet from investing.

Nothing will stop the wealthy from investing, because investing will always be the best way to earn income. Your money earning money is always better than you working for money, even if they (ideally) have the same tax rate.